2 ms·
Making explicit whether a ticket is a guaranteed placement or is a waitlist would make the practice clearer. I don't know what the no-show fraction is, so pull
by dredmorbius 3y ago
Making explicit whether a ticket is a guaranteed placement or is a waitlist would make the practice clearer.
I don't know what the no-show fraction is, so pulling numbers out of /dev/ass: airlines might be mandated to sell 85% of tickets as assured placement (with corresponding cancellation penalities), and 25% of seats as provisional or standbye. Most of the standbye tickets would actually be seated, some would not. (In my hypothetical, the flight is 10% overbooked.) In the event of a standbye ticketholder being bumped, they'd be promoted to guaranteed placement on the next available flight (and perhaps given a service upgrade as well.)
People with flexible travel schedules (students, some vacationers) could opt for a lower-cost provisional ticket. Those with fixed iteneraries or group-travel requirements (business travellers, families, etc.) would buy a guaranteed seat. Airlines could of course vary pricing by ticket class accordingly.
In this case, the status and pricing would be explicit.
And the overbooking / provisional fraction would likely vary by conditions --- high-travel periods, days of the week, and/or time-of-day might have a larger share of provisional seats. Low-travel periods, where flights are not fully booked would offer a larger share of, or exclusively, guaranteed tickets.
Much of what I describe already exists, but effectively all coach-class ticketholders are provisional. Bumping occurs rarely, but can be highly disruptive when it does occur. With an explicit class of provisional tickets, expectations and needs could be better met.